Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote: Where did this issue of intent come from? Did the ref mention that during the game? I haven't watched the second half yet, just highlights. Is it possible he just meant the player was trying to bat the ball backward and it ended up going forward because of it's spin, not because of the bat, which is what you can see on camera. Maybe that's all he meant by intent.

In any case, he reviewed it on replay and has said that he based his decision on the direction the ball came out of the pile when the center batted it. Hopefully, in the future, if a similar decision has to be made it will once again be made on the visual evidence.

Ah yes. Were did I get the intent from.

Wrolstad added that he didn’t believe that the Cardinals player who touched the ball, John Estes, intentionally pushed the ball forwards. If he had, the play would not have been permissible.

http://blog.startribune.com/sports/acce ... te-game-td

Raptorman wrote:http://blog.startribune.com/sports/acce ... te-game-td

Vikings head coach Mike Zimmer said that an official initially told him not to worry about the review because a fumble cannot be advanced on fourth down. But it turned out it wasn’t a fumble.

“Then the official came up to me and said it was a backwards pass because the quarterback never had possession of the ball so it wasn’t a fumble,” he said. “They were able to advance it. There were some other things that happened on that play that probably didn’t get called. The officials in this league do a great job. They really do. We don’t always agree with them, but they do a great job.”

You know what I love about that quote? Mike Zimmer making points with the refs. Smart man.

Webbfann wrote:
Well, they did forget it, because the exact words were "almost forgot how to say game winning drive" and it was in our last regular season game just 2 games ago! People think Cassel should start, but people in the stands will be chanting for the backup QB as soon as he throws an interception or has one bad game. Actually they are chanting for the backup now, when Cassel has been nearly flawless. Poor Massel. People will be chanting for Teddy if he does anything short of walk on water.

Go back and read what people said about Ponder's first game and first starts. How quickly people forget, indeed. It all looked sooo promising. They spoke of his smart play for a rookie, his poise in the pocket under pressure (I'm not joking!!), not getting happy feet (I'm not joking!), and his comeback ability (I'm not joking!). I hope Teddy is the future too and I believe he will be but he has played less than one preseason game against backups so far. It is way too soon to forget these other things.

Ugh..Cassel apologists. Hahaha jk jk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just Me wrote: Um, I think Ponder's was better actually, although I'm thinking of Ponder's first regular season appearance. Don't remember his first preseason appearance.

I think we're in agreement that Teddy is the future. I'm just pointing out the fickle, forgetful, hot cold nature of fans some of who were ready to throw Teddy under the bus one week and now he's golden.

Raptorman wrote:Ah yes. Were did I get the intent from.
http://blog.startribune.com/sports/acce ... te-game-td

Thanks for the info. It's not a direct quote so it woudl be nice to know if that word choice was referee Craig Wrolstad's or writer Matt Vensel's (or both) but in the end, I don't think it's important as long as the ref based the actual decision on what he saw on the field and on replay.

If it comes up in another game, it will be interesting to see how it's officiated.

Did someone get the C'mon Man segment from tonight Monday Night Countdown before the Browns vs Redskins game?

2 parts from the vikes game -
1) the holly roller part 2
2) video of the game winning drive only for the Vikes website to show "Vikes lose late to the Cardinals" even though at the top of the page it showed the correct score.

Found it - starting around the 1:15 mark -

Gotta love CC. We do need to stop that losing attitude! First, let's stop losing!

Not that it's important - thank God it was preseason, and not the NFC Championship game screwing us over - but intent is really superfluous in any other setting I can think of for such things. If a QB lobs a pass to a running back towards the sidelines, and it starts out slightly forward, but the wind blows it so that it hits the ground slightly behind where it is thrown, it's a lateral/fumble. It's where the ball ends up, not the QB's intent or the direction of first motion. At the end of the game, teams try the Cal-Stanford play, and no one is trying to pass the ball forwards - intent - but if it happens, by original direction or wind blowing the ball, it's still a forward pass and play is dead. Right?

I agree that it was nice to see Teddy get the opportunity with the weird call. I just hope the NFL looks at this play and clarifies the rule, not just leaving it up to referee discretion. Like how Schwartz of the Lions lost a TD on a bad challenge, but the refs made up a rule about the play "already being reviewed" (which of course wasn't the case) to make sure the Packers didn't suffer the consequences against us a couple years ago.

I was in New Orleans on a family trip while the game was on, but I found the game and watched it last night. Here are a few of my thoughts:

Matt Cassel is looking good. He missed Flash on that first drive, but he put the ball where CP had a chance and Patrick Peterson didn't. When challenging one of the best and most talented corners in the game, sometimes it's okay to be a bit conservative. He had a similar throw to Rudy in the endzone where the ball was a bit high, but it hit the receiver in the hands and you can't really blame Matt. The rest of his game was a joy to watch. He showed really nice mobility and pocket presence. He's never going to be Cam Newton, but he showed enough with his feet where he's not a statue in the backfield.

Kyle Rudolph, outside of missing the aforementioned TD, is looking like he's next in line to own the NFL. This guy has a chance to really cause some mismatches. I think he's going to add a dimension to our offense similar to when Norv had Antonio Gates and LT.

Jerome Simpson actually made a nice catch where he had to turn around and catch it from behind across the middle. He missed that fade late in the game, but he's not stinking it up like I've heard some others suggest. Greg Jennings is looking more like that 85 from Green Bay that always torched us than he has in a long time. Thielen played well, but missed a big opportunity, and Rodney Smith seized every opportunity he had. We might really have a special corps here.

Xavier Rhodes is contesting everything. He has a chance to be one of the NFL's elite. He sticks close to his receivers and really laid the wood. Between Xavier and Harrison Smith, we have the blocks for a very nice secondary.

I want to like Asiata, but I couldn't help but think that he lacked burst in the worst kind of way. Obviously, Adrian is the best in the game. But it was so obvious to me how many more yards Adrian would have had that Asiata was missing. When you combine how explosive Banyard looked (poor man's Sproles?) and McKinnon's draft position (he has been talked up as a Sproles type, but I see him more like Michael Turner: limited wiggle but nice strength/straight line speed combo), I think Asiata has a chance of getting cut. If we really need a bruiser in a pinch, Felton can serve that role. Speaking of Felton, it was nice to see him get a decent workload on the night.

Chad Greenway is playing the run as well as ever, but he gave up a TD pass that I would have liked to see him contest just a little bit more. Anthony Barr still isn't a finished product, but YOWZA his athleticism shines some time. He might have an opportunity to have a rookie season similar to Aldon Smith where he doesn't have to be a full-time player, he just has to be an athletic freak that draws attention away from the other guys. Brinkley will probably never be a good nickel linebacker, but on the goal line he has some nice run support.

It's really, really rough watching Walsh struggle. I thought he was definitely a Top-5 K in the league after his rookie season, but we're seeing that inconsistency again. I wonder if Locke holding instead of Kluwe has anything to do with it?

It was also difficult to watch the defense give up an early TD and let Arizona convert FOUR 4th down tries.

Of course, the low points were easily erased when watching our young QB trot the field with ice in his veins. He's still not ready for week 1, but THIS is what we needed to see from him to give us hope. I haven't felt more confident in our QBs since 2009, and even then I was terrified Favre would get injured.


Basically, the team still has things to clean up (and always will) but I can't imagine being any happier with the end result from a preseason game!

DKSweets wrote: I want to like Asiata, but I couldn't help but think that he lacked burst in the worst kind of way. Obviously, Adrian is the best in the game. But it was so obvious to me how many more yards Adrian would have had that Asiata was missing. When you combine how explosive Banyard looked (poor man's Sproles?) and McKinnon's draft position (he has been talked up as a Sproles type, but I see him more like Michael Turner: limited wiggle but nice strength/straight line speed combo), I think Asiata has a chance of getting cut. If we really need a bruiser in a pinch, Felton can serve that role. Speaking of Felton, it was nice to see him get a decent workload on the night.

I guess it could happen, but I highly doubt Asiata gets cut. He's the best blocking back and best receiving back out of any of the backups. Turner and others have all pointed out how good he's looked in camp. He also plays special teams and can fill in at both FB/RB. He's just the most versatile guy out of all the backups. I'm guessing we're going to see a decent amount of Asiata in to block/catch similar to how we used to see Taylor.

http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_26 ... ng-noticed
http://www.chatsports.com/minnesota-vik ... 2-10148415

Crax wrote: I guess it could happen, but I highly doubt Asiata gets cut. He's the best blocking back and best receiving back out of any of the backups. Turner and others have all pointed out how good he's looked in camp. He also plays special teams and can fill in at both FB/RB. He's just the most versatile guy out of all the backups. I'm guessing we're going to see a decent amount of Asiata in to block/catch similar to how we used to see Taylor.

http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_26 ... ng-noticed
http://www.chatsports.com/minnesota-vik ... 2-10148415

Given what I've read about how much they've loved Asiata in training camp, I fear you're right. Banyard has little chance of becoming the 3rd running back. But I doubt very much that we'll see much of Asiata given that McKinnon is the de facto second RB. McKinnon will have to fail pretty miserably, or else he or Peterson will have to be hurt, before we see much of Asiata this year.

I don't see them putting McKinnon in for blocking on 3rd down. I'm sure Mckinnon will get some running touches, but I'd wager we'll see Asiata for more blocking/receiving than mckinnon this year

Perhaps. I suspect we'll be seeing a lot more of Peterson on 3rd down this year. If the Vikings cart Asiata onto the field on 3rd down, it's like announcing to the defense "this guy will NOT be getting a hand off and he will NOT be the primary receiver".

Sure, but if it's 3rd and long, I wouldn't expect them to run a draw up the middle this year